Options

BBC Three move online the end of the channel or the start of more channels switching?

linkinpark875linkinpark875 Posts: 29,703
Forum Member
✭✭✭
As the title says will it spell the end for the channel or be the start of more channels turning off there SD + HD in favour of online only?
«13

Comments

  • Options
    VDUBsterVDUBster Posts: 1,423
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    It will be the end of it.
    It is not going online in the form of a channel, itnwill be nothing more than a webpage that links to the iPlayer for what little BBC Three programmes there are left.

    Its a big shame because BBC Three was useful during events such as Glastonbury where it could devote airtime primarily for that event.

    No. I do not believe current channels will turn of the linear broadcasts and broadcast only over the internet, they would 90+% of their viewers if they did!
  • Options
    linkinpark875linkinpark875 Posts: 29,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    VDUBster wrote: »
    Its a big shame because BBC Three was useful during events such as Glastonbury where it could devote airtime primarily for that event.

    Yep does the red button alternative even carry HD? :confused:
  • Options
    VDUBsterVDUBster Posts: 1,423
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Yep does the red button alternative even carry HD? :confused:

    In most cases BBC Three was used aswell as RB, so it is still a loss.
  • Options
    hyperstarspongehyperstarsponge Posts: 16,719
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    This could mean more music festivals on BBC Two.
  • Options
    stv viewerstv viewer Posts: 17,567
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    This could mean more music festivals on BBC Two.

    Also I can see BBC Four being used more as well
  • Options
    roadshow2006roadshow2006 Posts: 1,768
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    This could mean more music festivals on BBC Two.
    Unlikely to be to the extent of 7am - midnight though, especially not in years where we have Wimbledon, the World Cup, etc which means stuff is pushed off BBC 1.

    Once BBC Three is gone I can only assume BBC Four will be next. TV won't make sense without BBC Three.
  • Options
    hyperstarspongehyperstarsponge Posts: 16,719
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    Unlikely to be to the extent of 7am - midnight though, especially not in years where we have Wimbledon, the World Cup, etc which means stuff is pushed off BBC 1.

    Once BBC Three is gone I can only assume BBC Four will be next. TV won't make sense without BBC Three.

    That could get away with a name change.
  • Options
    VDUBsterVDUBster Posts: 1,423
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    stv viewer wrote: »
    Also I can see BBC Four being used more as well
    You see that, it's a pig flying...

    The BBC Four demographic would have a heart attack, literally, if BBC Four content was replaced with live music or sporting events as happens on BBC Three.
  • Options
    hyperstarspongehyperstarsponge Posts: 16,719
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    VDUBster wrote: »
    You see that, it's a pig flying...

    The BBC Four demographic would have a heart attack, literally, if BBC Four content was replaced with live music or sporting events as happens on BBC Three.

    BBC Two and BBC Red Button could get away with it.
  • Options
    ohglobbitsohglobbits Posts: 4,482
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think there will inevitably be more channel closures in the years to come, especially ones not available to all, due to the gradual decline of advertising revenue. In France seven channels have or are going to close this year with two more threatened with closure. These are all pay channels.
  • Options
    itscoldoutsideitscoldoutside Posts: 3,190
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think over the next ten years the way TV is delivered is going to change. The current watch as something is broadcast, I think will only last for another 20 years. Obviously there will always be live TV for news but most of the others will cease to become channels and just provide content like Netflix.
  • Options
    ohglobbitsohglobbits Posts: 4,482
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think over the next ten years the way TV is delivered is going to change. The current watch as something is broadcast, I think will only last for another 20 years. Obviously there will always be live TV for news but most of the others will cease to become channels and just provide content like Netflix.
    This would only work if many different broadcasters got together to create a subscription service where their content is pooled together. Certainly this is feasible but I suppose the question is what motive would traditional broadcasters have to make their first run content available to all at once and presumably for a pre-determined sum that may not take into account popularity (and how can that be determined as On Demand presumably has no viewing figures) and would certainly be less than they'd get if they showed it in linear form. (with advertising revenue etc)
  • Options
    RichardcoulterRichardcoulter Posts: 30,380
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    VDUBster wrote: »
    It will be the end of it.
    It is not going online in the form of a channel, itnwill be nothing more than a webpage that links to the iPlayer for what little BBC Three programmes there are left.

    Its a big shame because BBC Three was useful during events such as Glastonbury where it could devote airtime primarily for that event.

    No. I do not believe current channels will turn of the linear broadcasts and broadcast only over the internet, they would 90+% of their viewers if they did!

    Now that BBC1 +1 won't be using the former BBC3 capacity, they may use the old BBC3 spectrum as a pop up channel.
    Unlikely to be to the extent of 7am - midnight though, especially not in years where we have Wimbledon, the World Cup, etc which means stuff is pushed off BBC 1.

    Once BBC Three is gone I can only assume BBC Four will be next. TV won't make sense without BBC Three.

    If you mean because of the jump from BBC2 to BBC4, i'm sure that the BBC would argue that it makes sense as BBC3 still exists in a different format.
  • Options
    Ash_M1Ash_M1 Posts: 18,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    ohglobbits wrote: »
    I think there will inevitably be more channel closures in the years to come, especially ones not available to all, due to the gradual decline of advertising revenue. In France seven channels have or are going to close this year with two more threatened with closure. These are all pay channels.

    I think the closure of a whole load of commercial channels would be a good thing. It would benefit the commercial sector and hopefully the viewer too. Right now, there are far to many and there isn't enough ad-revenue to support them...
  • Options
    linkinpark875linkinpark875 Posts: 29,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    ohglobbits wrote: »
    I think there will inevitably be more channel closures in the years to come, especially ones not available to all, due to the gradual decline of advertising revenue. In France seven channels have or are going to close this year with two more threatened with closure. These are all pay channels.

    Really? Do share more on why they are closing? I posted about Sky Germany a few weeks ago they also have less channels than the UK.

    I reckon advertisers must he too generious with what they pay otherwise channels like C5+24 wouldn't be viable. I mean a duplicate of yesterday's tv would be laughable back in the 90's with 5 channels.
  • Options
    linkinpark875linkinpark875 Posts: 29,703
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    I think over the next ten years the way TV is delivered is going to change. The current watch as something is broadcast, I think will only last for another 20 years. Obviously there will always be live TV for news but most of the others will cease to become channels and just provide content like Netflix.

    BT moved online too did they not? Im sure they now deliver BT Sports through online rather than SD broadcasts right?
  • Options
    ohglobbitsohglobbits Posts: 4,482
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Really? Do share more on why they are closing? I posted about Sky Germany .
    Three of the channels belong to France's Sky equivalent Canal + who have decided that the sums they received from pay TV providers to carry them weren't enough to justify keeping the channels open. The series shown on channels such as Canal Jimmy are now available exclusively on Canal + Series or Canal Play. (channels not available on other pay tv packages)


    The other channels owned by TF1 and M6 are closing or might close because

    1: Difficulties in getting onto TNT (equivalent of Freeview except only 25 channels)
    2: Carriers aren't offering enough money to offset the decreasing advertising revenue
  • Options
    hyperstarspongehyperstarsponge Posts: 16,719
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I think over the next ten years the way TV is delivered is going to change. The current watch as something is broadcast, I think will only last for another 20 years. Obviously there will always be live TV for news but most of the others will cease to become channels and just provide content like Netflix.

    There still be place for BBC4 content as that audience is quite royal to that channel. Also would need somewhere to show live performances from Glastonbury.
  • Options
    mossy2103mossy2103 Posts: 84,308
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Also would need somewhere to show live performances from Glastonbury.
    Probably internet streams as well as Connected Red Button (which would be the logical companion approach to an online BBC Three).
  • Options
    ktla5ktla5 Posts: 1,683
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Now that BBC1 +1 won't be using the former BBC3 capacity, they may use the old BBC3 spectrum as a pop up channel.



    If you mean because of the jump from BBC2 to BBC4, i'm sure that the BBC would argue that it makes sense as BBC3 still exists in a different format.

    If BBC3 simply becomes an on line channel, but stays as it is now, same programmes, times etc, but just available on Iplayer, does that make Iplayer subject to a TV Licence payment as it will or would be the equivalent to 'live tv', and of course if you watch the BBC (or any tv) as it goes out by whatever method you need a licence
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 7,488
    Forum Member
    ktla5 wrote: »
    If BBC3 simply becomes an on line channel, but stays as it is now, same programmes, times etc, but just available on Iplayer, does that make Iplayer subject to a TV Licence payment as it will or would be the equivalent to 'live tv', and of course if you watch the BBC (or any tv) as it goes out by whatever method you need a licence

    I believe since it isn't being broadcast over the air, you wouldn't need a licence, but the BBC have a charter renewal and are currently trying to amend the terms so everyone that watches any kind of TV on catch-up also needs a licence.
  • Options
    jrmich9jrmich9 Posts: 1,119
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BT moved online too did they not? Im sure they now deliver BT Sports through online rather than SD broadcasts right?

    Yes, BT deliver Entertainment and their sports channels in SD and HD via online, and Sky Sports 1/2 and Sky Movies in SD via online as well. They also integrate these channels in the same EPG with Freeview channels as well.

    Seems to be a much more affordable form of content delivery than paying for DTT space.
  • Options
    anthony davidanthony david Posts: 14,511
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    There still be place for BBC4 content as that audience is quite royal to that channel. Also would need somewhere to show live performances from Glastonbury.

    The Paloma Faith Prom was shown on BBC4 together with Radio3. There is quite a bit of popular music on BBC4.
  • Options
    VDUBsterVDUBster Posts: 1,423
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    BT moved online too did they not? Im sure they now deliver BT Sports through online rather than SD broadcasts right?
    jrmich9 wrote: »
    Yes, BT deliver Entertainment and their sports channels in SD and HD via online, and Sky Sports 1/2 and Sky Movies in SD via online as well. They also integrate these channels in the same EPG with Freeview channels as well.

    Seems to be a much more affordable form of content delivery than paying for DTT space.
    But then BT are a IPTV supplier, so obviously they are going to provide them over the internet. Their TV business is IPTV, like Sky's is Satellite and VM's is cable.
    ktla5 wrote: »
    If BBC3 simply becomes an on line channel, but stays as it is now, same programmes, times etc, but just available on Iplayer, does that make Iplayer subject to a TV Licence payment as it will or would be the equivalent to 'live tv', and of course if you watch the BBC (or any tv) as it goes out by whatever method you need a licence
    I highly doubt that it will be an online channel anyway. Shows that were shown on BBC Three are going to be shown on BBC Two instead (such as Russel Howard's Good News) and the budget is being cut.

    It will be nothing more than a webpage with BBC Branding linking to the little 'BBC Three' programming there is left on the iPlayer.

    Doesn't the TV Licence already cover live TV on the internet anyway?
  • Options
    carl.waringcarl.waring Posts: 35,720
    Forum Member
    I believe since it isn't being broadcast over the air, you wouldn't need a licence..
    Wrong. If it is being shown live (ie to a schedule) - even on iPlayer - then you need TVL.
    .. but the BBC have a charter renewal and are currently trying to amend the terms so everyone that watches any kind of TV on catch-up also needs a licence.
    Which, of course, is absolutely right and fair.
    VDUBster wrote: »
    Doesn't the TV Licence already cover live TV on the internet anyway?
    Yes, it does. Which, when you think about it, is really odd. When you try to watch TV live through iPlayer you sometimes get that "don't forget you need a TVL" reminder pop-up but you don't (currently) need a TVL to watch non-live programmes through the same site/app. Weird, right? :confused::)
Sign In or Register to comment.